Women Working Worldwide (WWW) is running an education and consultation project on codes of conduct with workers groups in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, The Philippines, and Sri Lanka. All the groups support women workers who are producing garments for the world market, some in factories inside and outside free trade zones, some in small workshops. The groups came together for the first time at a workshop in Sri Lanka in December 1998 where they reported on their work.

Background
As one of the organisations co-ordinating the UK Labour Behind the Label network (that's the UK Clean Clothes Campaign), WWW has been centrally involved in the campaign to use consumer pressure to persuade companies to adopt properly monitored codes of conduct. WWW is also a member of the NGO group of the Ethical Trading Initiative which works together with trade unions and companies to ensure the implementation of properly monitored codes. At the same time however WWW has voiced a concern that codes are being promoted by campaigners and adopted by companies without workers’ knowledge and involvement. WWW believes that as long as workers remain marginalised from the development, implementation, and monitoring of codes then the value of these codes will be questionable. It is therefore seen as paramount that programmes of education and awareness raising take place in the South alongside the campaigning and advocacy work in Europe.

Therefore WWW organized a consultation and education programme on codes of conduct. The first stage was a small research exercise in Asia. This involved getting a sense of how much both workers and activists knew about codes and assessing their initial reactions. Not surprisingly, WWW found that none of the workers who participated had heard about codes, including those who were producing for a well-known company, such as Nike and the Gap, which have codes. However, once the idea was explained the workers responded in a way which demonstrated a high level of awareness of the potential and the limitations of introducing codes into their own workplace. For example there was considerable skepticism about the likelihood of codes being properly implemented and monitored. At the same time there was an enthusiasm for more information, discussion, and the involvement of more workers.

On the basis of this initial exercise WWW produced educational materials on codes which were distributed to the groups involved in the project. Between August and November1998 the material was translated and used in discussion sessions with groups of Asian workers. This in itself was a great achievement: It was during this time that Indonesia was in greatest political turmoil and two thirds of Bangladesh was under flood water. In all cases workers had little free time to hold discussions and many fear victimisation which meant that sometimes the sessions were held in secret. In spite of these difficulties the groups reported that the exercises had been positive and productive.

Feedback from Workers
In all cases workers had previously known nothing about codes and the educational material not only increased their understanding but also gave them greater confidence in their right to better conditions. From Bangladesh it was reported that "Participants became aware that foreign consumers and companies are trying to do something good for them. They have got the feeling that they are not alone. As a result their level of awareness and their sense of their rights was raised.” Shadida, a young worker, who participated in the exercise said, “I came to know how we should be treated by factory owners. I shall use this knowledge for our betterment.”

Workers were particularly responsive to the idea of drawing up their own code and all were inspired by the story of how this became an organising strategy amongst workers in Nicaragua. “The case of the Nicaraguan Free Trade Zone workers who struggled for ratification of their own codes was extremely convincing for women workers,” reported the Pakistan Women Workers Organisation on their experience of workers reactions to the idea of codes. “However they saw Nicaraguan women workers’ level of awareness and social set up as quite different. They had unity but we are scattered. They were conscious of their rights but we are quite unaware. At the moment in Pakistan we are not capable of of this kind of movement , but it is an encouraging and practical example,”

All the groups involved also reported that the session on subcontracting chains was very useful. In some cases, for example in Indonesia, workers said they were “inspired by the questions....but they had never thought about it before and found it very difficult.” Participants from Sri Lanka noted that the session helped workers and activists to share information they already had and identify areas for further research. “We discovered a large number of gaps in our knowledge and the need for more research. One discovery was that some factories subcontract work to small sweatshops where workers are paid even less and get no social security benefits. This is significant because it is widely believed that there is no such subcontracting in Sri Lanka.”

All groups were enthusiastic about using brand labels as a way of tracing global production chains and some brought examples to the workshop. Participants from Pakistan felt that “Through labels workers got knowledge about which international companies are buying their goods. Garment workers who were working for Gap, Nike, and Levis showed curiosity to know about the companies codes. After learning about them they were quite surprised because in reality the working conditions are totally opposite to the codes." In India workers wanted to “find out at what rate garments were sold to buyers and to customers, and the turnover of their company as a whole."

Most groups found that time limitations prevented full discussion of different codes and how codes should be implemented and monitored. Nevertheless, workers were able to make a number of clear suggestions. Everywhere the involvement of workers themselves was considered crucial. In India the workers involved in the exercise “...were very emphatic that they need to organise themselves to implement and monitor codes, whether company codes or their own.” Differing circumstances affected workers assessment of whether this could be done through trade unions. The group of workers participating in the educational exercise in the Philippines, drawn from garment factories in the Baguio City Export Processing Zone, emphasized genuine trade unionism as essential to successful monitoring. “With a union workers will feel safe to testify against the company's violations.... Independent monitoring bodies may be composed of NGOs that uphold workers interests and genuine trade union leaders. Workers emphasised though that NGO representatives and union leaders should be open to criticism to avoid corruption and to build up and maintain their credibility with workers."

Discussion about local and international solidarity was seen as important by all groups. Workers everywhere were interested to learn that workers in other countries were facing similar problems and were keen to share experience. The development of links with consumer groups was also recognized as important. The report back on the educational sessions held in Sri Lanka noted that “The main problem they faced was victimisation by employers and the state if they attempted to organised and agitate for their demands, and they felt that this could be overcome by building solidarity." In Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in particular it was seen as crucial to build this solidarity in the local community. Through publicising codes of conduct more widely through the media and other channels workers felt that a climate of public opinion could be built up which would make it increasingly difficult for violations to take place.

Workshop Raises Important Questions
After reports of the educational sessions were presented at the Sri Lanka workshop a number of key issues were identified for discussion:

1. Is it important for workers to talk about codes?
There was more or less consensus that it is important. Since companies have started introducing codes but workers and activists have little idea of what is going on, it is important for them to be informed, and to decide how codes fit into the wider perspective of workers organisation and struggle.

2. What can codes do for workers? What is the relationship between codes and collective bargaining?
The possibility that codes might have a negative impact if they are seen as a substitute for collective bargaining was considered. The participants felt that if codes include the right to form unions and bargain collectively and if it is understood that they are not the solution to workers problems, then this is not a danger. There are different levels of awareness; activists will realise the limitations of codes but other workers may not, so it is important to point this out. In countries like Indonesia, where a repressive government makes it impossible for workers to be experienced regarding collective bargaining or labour law, workers could use codes as a way of getting their rights, particularly the right to organise.
It was considered important that codes include the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining which is not in most company codes. However even this right is meaningless if workers can simply be dismissed if they try to organise. Therefore it is equally important to have a proper legal employment relationship.

3. What is the relationship between codes and national legislation?
It was generally felt that company codes are not a substitute for fighting for stronger labour law and better implementation of existing legislation because they only cover some workers -- those producing for export -- whereas legislation would also cover those producing for the domestic market. Also it was noted that codes could have a negative impact on some workers, for example, child workers or homeworkers and other informal sector workers who might lose jobs if production is more formalised - whereas legislation can be designed to protect the rights and interest of these sectors too. However legislation suffers from the disadvantage that it is purely national; if a company feels that labour legislation in one country is too strong it can shift to another country. This is not the case with codes which are applicable in all countries. Therefore it was felt that a company code could be a useful supplement to good national legislation provided it:
- is universally applicable rather than differing from company to company
- includes union rights
- is properly monitored by an independent agency.

Future plans
Most of the groups were keen to continue awareness raising and educational work on codes. This includes further educational sesssions, the dissemination of material to more organisations, local publicity and national and regional workshops. There was also a recognition of the importance of international links, particularly for the tracing of labels and for dealing with violations of company codes. A similar project is underway in Central America together with the UK Central America Womens Network. A workshop involving six women workers groups took place in Nicaragua in early May.

For more information on this project or for copies of the educational materials and workshop report, please contact WWW.

The Clean Clothes Campaign, in conjunction with IRENE (International Restructuring Education Network Europe), is organizing a conference that will focus specifically on the issue of worker education and the relevance of codes of conduct. Educational initiatives, such as the WWW project described here, will be discussed and future strategies will be formulated. The two-day event is tentatively scheduled for mid-December 1999. For more information on the content of this conference, please contact:

IRENE
Stationsstraat 39
5038 EC Tilburg
The Netherlands
Tel. +31-13-535-1523
Fax: +31-13-535-0253
E-mail: irene@irene.antenna.nl